I just reread the article to be sure I hadn't glossed over it, and I personally do not see any clear account of sexism. She says it was there, and I believe her (because sexism at a tech startup is about as surprising as ants at a picnic), but she doesn't clearly describe it at all. None of the specific grievances she cites have any clear connection to her gender.
PS: Sorry people are hating so much on your reply. I do appreciate your overall point.
This isn't rape, you know. Sexism isn't an event. It's an atmosphere. She describes the atmosphere. Short of providing hours of videos or recordings, I'm not sure how much more clear she could have put it. Of course, if she had, those would have been generally dismissed as aberrations, or, more likely, as her "misunderstanding" the situation, or "natural in a competitive environment".
But that's not surprising either, because the HN community is sexist, and those are textbook responses to allegations of sexism.
If she does not give examples of the sexist atmosphere, we can't accurately form opinions about GitHub and GitHub can't address her concerns.
If I'm missing an actual example of sexism from her post, other than the hulahooping situation which I've already noted and addressed, please enlighten me.
"aggressive communication on pull requests and how little the men I worked with respected and valued my opinion"
"character started being discussed in inappropriate places like on pull requests and issues"
"she felt she was being treated differently internally simply due to her gender and not the quality of her work"
These are actual examples of sexism. I don't know what exactly you were expecting. Pictures of men dropping their pants? Because that's not sexism; that's sexual harassment. Sexism is an atmosphere and a culture which she says she experienced. Please read up on what sexism is before placing yourself in the role of the lawyer for the defense. Just ask yourself this: were you displaying the same sort of skepticism in the Aaron Swartz case, or were you inclined to believe his accounts or the accounts of those close to him? If the answer is that you weren't skeptical back then, then you're displaying sexist behavior right now even if you don't feel like you are or it's not your intention.
When someone accuses you of sexism, then you are probably sexist even if you don't see it, precisely because you can't see it. It's just like someone telling you you've got something stuck in your teeth. When someone tells you you've got something stuck in your teeth, you don't assume they're lying, but you go look in the mirror; if you don't, you run the risk of looking stupid. Sexism is exactly the same: if someone tells you you're sexist, you go look in the mirror long and hard. If you deny it, you just look stupid, because how do you deny something that you can't see?
When someone accuses you of sexism, then you are probably sexist even if you don't see it
And isn't that convenient?
This is the reason why people are scared to death of a mere accusation of sexism or racism.
Of course, we can joke about it, and quote Avenue Q ("everyone's a little bit racist..."), but it's just about as easy to defend against as being accused of being a Communist in 1950s Hollywood, or being accused of being a witch in 1620s New England. Once the taint is attached to a person, especially in a high profile or scandalous case, it hangs around for a while.
In reality, all that we can determine when A accuses B of sexism, is that A experiences something B is doing as sexist (or thinks they do). But A could be mistaken, A could have an axe to grind with B, or it could simply be a difference of opinion about what is sexist and what is not. To say otherwise is just jumping to conclusions.
In reality, all that we can determine when A accuses B of sexism, is that A experiences something B is doing as sexist (or thinks they do).
Yes. That's usually what sexism is. What A experiences.
But A could be mistaken
In theory - yes. In practice, chances of that are low, especially in tech. You see, tech is such a sexist environment, that if anyone experiences sexism in your company, it's probably there. Even if no one experiences it it's probably there. Unlike Communism in the 50s, though, it's no biggie. You listen, try to understand, identify and empathize and fix whatever needs fixing. That's not "jumping to conclusions", but realizing that this is a very serious problem in tech right now, and all you need to do is try and fix it. No one is getting blacklisted or going to jail.
And it's not a "taint", unless the allegations are of something far more serious than simple sexism (like sexual harassment).
What I don't understand is why would anyone, when faced with the accusation that some of their employees feel unsafe or bullied, would try to fight this. If someone tells you the atmosphere in your company makes them uncomfortable, you better listen. You shouldn't take offense by someone calling you sexist because chances are that you are. Why? Because we are flooded with sexist ideas starting in kindergarten and everywhere else since. Think of it is a vestigial social appendage. Everybody has it. It's ingrained in us. If someone points that out to you, you should be thankful, because you're seeing something that you're not accustomed to seeing. It can be truly eye opening and enlightening, and unlike some interesting fact about the big bang, this knowledge can make living in our society a lot better for everyone.
I think part of the challenge is that people are conditioned by media to view "sexism" or "racism" only in the grossest extremes, as things that are only done by truly evil people. For example: "sexism" as the boss who gropes his female subordinates and proposes sexual services in exchange for special treatment or promotions; "racism" as the cross-burning Klansmen or curb-stomping skinheads.
As such, admitting to "a little" sexism or "a little" racism is viewed by many as a one way slippery slope of perception where their friends and colleagues will soon be viewing them as those aforementioned examples of undiluted evil.
Additionally, from a tactical / practical point of view, it may be unwise to admit anything in front of HR, which generally exists primarily to protect the company's ass from liability, and only incidentally to protect the employees. No one wants to be written up or sent to sensitivity training.
I am attempting to look in the mirror, and it looks like GitHub is as well. But saying ~"I felt like I was treated differently", and ~"There was overly aggressive communication on pull requests" is akin to telling someone "You had something in your teeth some time in the past year".
Comments
I just reread the article to be sure I hadn't glossed over it, and I personally do not see any clear account of sexism. She says it was there, and I believe her (because sexism at a tech startup is about as surprising as ants at a picnic), but she doesn't clearly describe it at all. None of the specific grievances she cites have any clear connection to her gender.
PS: Sorry people are hating so much on your reply. I do appreciate your overall point.
This isn't rape, you know. Sexism isn't an event. It's an atmosphere. She describes the atmosphere. Short of providing hours of videos or recordings, I'm not sure how much more clear she could have put it. Of course, if she had, those would have been generally dismissed as aberrations, or, more likely, as her "misunderstanding" the situation, or "natural in a competitive environment".
But that's not surprising either, because the HN community is sexist, and those are textbook responses to allegations of sexism.
If she does not give examples of the sexist atmosphere, we can't accurately form opinions about GitHub and GitHub can't address her concerns.
If I'm missing an actual example of sexism from her post, other than the hulahooping situation which I've already noted and addressed, please enlighten me.
"aggressive communication on pull requests and how little the men I worked with respected and valued my opinion"
"character started being discussed in inappropriate places like on pull requests and issues"
"she felt she was being treated differently internally simply due to her gender and not the quality of her work"
These are actual examples of sexism. I don't know what exactly you were expecting. Pictures of men dropping their pants? Because that's not sexism; that's sexual harassment. Sexism is an atmosphere and a culture which she says she experienced. Please read up on what sexism is before placing yourself in the role of the lawyer for the defense. Just ask yourself this: were you displaying the same sort of skepticism in the Aaron Swartz case, or were you inclined to believe his accounts or the accounts of those close to him? If the answer is that you weren't skeptical back then, then you're displaying sexist behavior right now even if you don't feel like you are or it's not your intention.
When someone accuses you of sexism, then you are probably sexist even if you don't see it, precisely because you can't see it. It's just like someone telling you you've got something stuck in your teeth. When someone tells you you've got something stuck in your teeth, you don't assume they're lying, but you go look in the mirror; if you don't, you run the risk of looking stupid. Sexism is exactly the same: if someone tells you you're sexist, you go look in the mirror long and hard. If you deny it, you just look stupid, because how do you deny something that you can't see?
When someone accuses you of sexism, then you are probably sexist even if you don't see it
And isn't that convenient?
This is the reason why people are scared to death of a mere accusation of sexism or racism.
Of course, we can joke about it, and quote Avenue Q ("everyone's a little bit racist..."), but it's just about as easy to defend against as being accused of being a Communist in 1950s Hollywood, or being accused of being a witch in 1620s New England. Once the taint is attached to a person, especially in a high profile or scandalous case, it hangs around for a while.
In reality, all that we can determine when A accuses B of sexism, is that A experiences something B is doing as sexist (or thinks they do). But A could be mistaken, A could have an axe to grind with B, or it could simply be a difference of opinion about what is sexist and what is not. To say otherwise is just jumping to conclusions.
Sexism is anything but convenient to its victims.
Yes. That's usually what sexism is. What A experiences.
In theory - yes. In practice, chances of that are low, especially in tech. You see, tech is such a sexist environment, that if anyone experiences sexism in your company, it's probably there. Even if no one experiences it it's probably there. Unlike Communism in the 50s, though, it's no biggie. You listen, try to understand, identify and empathize and fix whatever needs fixing. That's not "jumping to conclusions", but realizing that this is a very serious problem in tech right now, and all you need to do is try and fix it. No one is getting blacklisted or going to jail.
And it's not a "taint", unless the allegations are of something far more serious than simple sexism (like sexual harassment).
What I don't understand is why would anyone, when faced with the accusation that some of their employees feel unsafe or bullied, would try to fight this. If someone tells you the atmosphere in your company makes them uncomfortable, you better listen. You shouldn't take offense by someone calling you sexist because chances are that you are. Why? Because we are flooded with sexist ideas starting in kindergarten and everywhere else since. Think of it is a vestigial social appendage. Everybody has it. It's ingrained in us. If someone points that out to you, you should be thankful, because you're seeing something that you're not accustomed to seeing. It can be truly eye opening and enlightening, and unlike some interesting fact about the big bang, this knowledge can make living in our society a lot better for everyone.
I think part of the challenge is that people are conditioned by media to view "sexism" or "racism" only in the grossest extremes, as things that are only done by truly evil people. For example: "sexism" as the boss who gropes his female subordinates and proposes sexual services in exchange for special treatment or promotions; "racism" as the cross-burning Klansmen or curb-stomping skinheads.
As such, admitting to "a little" sexism or "a little" racism is viewed by many as a one way slippery slope of perception where their friends and colleagues will soon be viewing them as those aforementioned examples of undiluted evil.
Additionally, from a tactical / practical point of view, it may be unwise to admit anything in front of HR, which generally exists primarily to protect the company's ass from liability, and only incidentally to protect the employees. No one wants to be written up or sent to sensitivity training.
...
I am attempting to look in the mirror, and it looks like GitHub is as well. But saying ~"I felt like I was treated differently", and ~"There was overly aggressive communication on pull requests" is akin to telling someone "You had something in your teeth some time in the past year".